I'm not sure I wanna hire a coach who has no experience in the NFL at all........

Cochise

12-29-2005, 09:30 AM

dear lord... I'm not sure I can deal with 5 more years of mediocrity

dirk digler

12-29-2005, 09:30 AM

I'm not sure I wanna hire a coach who has no experience in the NFL at all........

That is the downside for Stoops but at the same time why keep re-circulating NFL coaches who get fired.

chagrin

12-29-2005, 09:30 AM

If Nick Atahn says it, it must be true!

With special consultant Phobia??

Seriously though, Stoops and Hermy? Does this mean DV has told CP he's not coming back?

jspchief

12-29-2005, 09:31 AM

Stoops' only success has come with superior talent.

In the NFL, where the talent is spread evenly, I question what he'll accomplish.

Mecca

12-29-2005, 09:32 AM

That is the downside for Stoops but at the same time why keep re-circulating NFL coaches who get fired.

If you're going to hire a college coach, why not someone like Kirk Ferentz? Atleast he does have experience coaching in the NFL. Nick Saban had NFL experience he's doing a good job. Spurrier didn't and he well tanked hard. Let's not forget that Stoops is a Spurrier coaching disciple.

jspchief

12-29-2005, 09:33 AM

That is the downside for Stoops but at the same time why keep re-circulating NFL coaches who get fired.I agree on head coach retreads, but college guys haven't been much better.

Look around at all the young HCs with bright futures and they are all promoted coordinators.

Clint in Wichita

12-29-2005, 09:33 AM

With special consultant Phobia??

Every time I think of Phobia "changing sites", I think of this picture. It was taken when the 2 met for the first time:

chagrin

12-29-2005, 09:35 AM

Every time I think of Phobia "changing sites", I think of this picture. It was taken when the 2 met for the first time:

ROFL

Frankth and Beanth!

Baby Lee

12-29-2005, 09:37 AM

ROFL

Frankth and Beanth!
You realize that guy is now Dan Dority on Deadwood? Blew my mind when that realization hit.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0114868/

siberian khatru

12-29-2005, 09:40 AM

This is probably unfair, but I can't get past the way OU finished the 2003 season, looking horrible against K-State and LSU.

Plus, they got obliterated by USC last year. Wasn't even competitive.

dirk digler

12-29-2005, 09:44 AM

If you're going to hire a college coach, why not someone like Kirk Ferentz? Atleast he does have experience coaching in the NFL. Nick Saban had NFL experience he's doing a good job. Spurrier didn't and he well tanked hard. Let's not forget that Stoops is a Spurrier coaching disciple.

I understand and you make a good point. I just think Stoops is an excellent football coach.

beavis

12-29-2005, 09:46 AM

Nick Athan told me he was from the planet Ogo, part of an intellectual elite, preparing to subjugate the barbarian hordes on Pluto.

dirk digler

12-29-2005, 09:46 AM

Bob Stoops Bio from http://www.soonersports.com

HEAD COACH BOB STOOPS
History is one tough customer at Oklahoma. The tradition, so rich and so long-standing, is as daunting as it is impressive. To be among the best at Oklahoma is to be among the best in college football.

Such dramatics are lost on Bob Stoops. The Sooner head coach befriended the would-be albatross of OU’s successful past from his first day on campus and remains steadfastly focused on tomorrow and the championship it holds.

It falls then to long-time observers and experts of the game to define Stoops’ impact. Rarely have the pundits had it so easy.

Under Stoops, Oklahoma has won 67 games, spent 68 consecutive weeks in the national rankings, played in six bowl games, four of the BCS variety, taken his team to three national championship games, and captured three Big 12 crowns. On a playing field leveled by scholarship limits and parity, this era stares down the Oklahoma standard and does not blink.

The achievement is so brilliant that it dulls the memory of what Stoops inherited. When he arrived in Norman, the proud Sooner program was five years removed from a winning record; four from a postseason appearance. Those atypical days of angst are so forgotten now that they might as well be categorized with the land rush and dust bowl.

Stoops has been characterized as a grounded family man, brilliant big-game coach, relentless recruiter, strong leader and a person with uncommon perspective. His success emanates from a disciplined style true to his roots in the Steel Valley of Ohio, but he is far from inflexible. The principles to which he holds are the tried and true axioms of the sport ... mixed with cutting edge strategy and an appreciation for the calculated risk.

During his time, OU has produced record–setting passers and receivers, two 1,000-yard rushers, suffocating defense and special teams units that rank among the most dynamic in the land. The Sooners have been nothing if not versatile.

The son of a coach, Stoops was a four-year starter at Iowa. He began his coaching career in 1983 as a volunteer in the Hawkeye program under Hayden Fry, working through the ranks until he became co-defensive coordinator at Kansas State (1991-95).

With the Wildcats, he played a key role in their impressive turnaround. During his final four seasons there, K-State was 35-12 with three bowl appearances.

Eventually, he left for Florida and a three-year stint as Steve Spurrier’s defensive coordinator. In 1996, he was part of a national championship team. It was with the Gators that the spotlight found Stoops and made him one of the hottest names in the profession. His hiring at Oklahoma was one for the ages.

Seriously though, Stoops and Hermy? Does this mean DV has told CP he's not coming back?

CP told DV he wasn't coming back.

tomahawk kid

12-29-2005, 09:54 AM

CP told DV he wasn't coming back.

You guessing here or do you have that on some authority?

dirk digler

12-29-2005, 09:55 AM

After doing some research on Kirk Ferentz, I think he would be a great choice as well. The guy is a Bill Belichick disciple along with Nick Saban.

Ok call me sold on Kirk Ferentz.

siberian khatru

12-29-2005, 09:57 AM

After doing some research on Kirk Ferentz, I think he would be a great choice as well. The guy is a Bill Belichick disciple along with Nick Saban.

Ok call me sold on Kirk Ferentz.

You and Parker make a cute couple.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 10:03 AM

You guessing here or do you have that on some authority?

Have you been paying attention to what's coming out of Peterson's mouth? I think it's pretty obvious what's going on...

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 10:03 AM

You and Parker make a cute couple.

Make fun. Laugh it up.

It doesn't diminish one thing Ferentz has done.

:D

dirk digler

12-29-2005, 10:06 AM

Make fun. Laugh it up.

It doesn't diminish one thing Ferentz has done.

:D

He's just jealous of us.

:)

siberian khatru

12-29-2005, 10:08 AM

:evil:

cdcox

12-29-2005, 10:09 AM

I have a strong feeling that I'm going to be disappointed with whoever we end up with.

tomahawk kid

12-29-2005, 10:09 AM

Have you been paying attention to what's coming out of Peterson's mouth? I think it's pretty obvious what's going on...

Are you bitter about something in particular?

jspchief

12-29-2005, 10:14 AM

A couple reasons why I like Ferentz over Stoops:

1. Pedigree. Ferentz comes from a lot more accomplished coaching tree, with pro experience.
2. Talent that the respective coaches had to work with. Oklahoma gets better athletes, and in college FB, athletes make any coach's job easier.
3. Ferentz is a "win in the trenches" guy. Look at the number of linemen he's sent to the NFL. It's not because he gets lucky recruiting. He knows how to coach these guys to be good.

Brock

12-29-2005, 10:17 AM

How many misspelled words, typos, and infinitive sentences did this article contain?

PS, this isn't the guy who said the Chiefs were hiring Neuheisel right before they hired Vermeil, was it?

milkman

12-29-2005, 10:18 AM

A couple reasons why I like Ferentz over Stoops:

1. Pedigree. Ferentz comes from a lot more accomplished coaching tree, with pro experience.
2. Talent that the respective coaches had to work with. Oklahoma gets better athletes, and in college FB, athletes make any coach's job easier.
3. Ferentz is a "win in the trenches" guy. Look at the number of linemen he's sent to the NFL. It's not because he gets lucky recruiting. He knows how to coach these guys to be good.

After reading Parker's posts on Ferentz, and reading his bio (Ferentz's, not Parker's :) ), I've warmed up to the idea of Ferentz as HC.

Saulbadguy

12-29-2005, 10:19 AM

Stoops' only success has come with superior talent.

In the NFL, where the talent is spread evenly, I question what he'll accomplish.
Disagree.

He's had success everywhere he goes, as an assistant and a HC. He won a National Title with someone elses talent, which was inferior to the talent he has now.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 10:19 AM

Are you bitter about something in particular?

Bitter? What makes you think I'm bitter?

I WANT DV gone.

I'd like nothing more than if Peterson told him his time was up.

I'm just saying what my opinion is based on what I've heard and read the past few days -- the decision, IMO, is out of DV's hands. He's going to be "asked" to retire.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 10:20 AM

A couple reasons why I like Ferentz over Stoops:

1. Pedigree. Ferentz comes from a lot more accomplished coaching tree, with pro experience.
2. Talent that the respective coaches had to work with. Oklahoma gets better athletes, and in college FB, athletes make any coach's job easier.
3. Ferentz is a "win in the trenches" guy. Look at the number of linemen he's sent to the NFL. It's not because he gets lucky recruiting. He knows how to coach these guys to be good.

Ferentz has developed some high quality NFL lines and linemen too. He helped develop Johnathan Ogden...

Saulbadguy

12-29-2005, 10:21 AM

Nick Athan told me he was from the planet Ogo, part of an intellectual elite, preparing to subjugate the barbarian hordes on Pluto.
But even though this is a totally convincing reality for me in every way, nevertheless Ogo is actually a construct of my psyche. I am mentally divergent, in that I am escaping certain unnamed realities that plague my life here. When I stop going there, I will be well. Are you also divergent, friend?

Mile High Mania

12-29-2005, 10:21 AM

I think Gary Kubiak is ready to be a head coach.

Saulbadguy

12-29-2005, 10:21 AM

IMO, Ferentz would be a good choice as well. Probably better than Stoops, but I still think Stoops would be a good choice.

dirk digler

12-29-2005, 10:22 AM

I think Gary Kubiak is ready to be a head coach.

ROFL

Pee-wee league team?

dirk digler

12-29-2005, 10:23 AM

IMO, Ferentz would be a good choice as well. Probably better than Stoops, but I still think Stoops would be a good choice.

Yep I don't we could go wrong with either of those 2.

siberian khatru

12-29-2005, 10:24 AM

I think Gary Kubiak is ready to be a head coach.

How long have you been trying to get rid of him now? ;)

B_Ambuehl

12-29-2005, 10:34 AM

After doing some research on Kirk Ferentz, I think he would be a great choice as well. The guy is a Bill Belichick disciple along with Nick Saban.

Ok call me sold on Kirk Ferentz.

So just because he once coached under Belichik makes him a great coach? Sorry but statements like these really get to me. If you're gonna recommend somebody or say somebody sux at least back it up with some kind've observation or statistic besides who's hand they're holding.

On the topic, here's one reason Stoops is a poor choice. Pete Carroll was making fun of his scheme last year, particularly his defense, saying it was overly simplistic and basic. He said the west coast teams were way ahead of other conferences as far as the advancement of their offensive and defensive schemes and said one reason they were able to win so easily vs OK was because they (OU) never made them think with their basic defense. If Stoop's defense can't stop a college football team how is he gonna scheme for an NFL football team?

He has also been outcoached big time by the likes of Nick Saban and Bill Snyder.

jspchief

12-29-2005, 10:39 AM

So just because he once coached under Belichik makes him a great coach? Yeah. That's it.

I take it you know nothing about Kirk Ferentz.

milkman

12-29-2005, 10:41 AM

Yeah. That's it.

I take it you know nothing.

Nothing else was needed.

Saulbadguy

12-29-2005, 10:41 AM

So just because he once coached under Belichik makes him a great coach? Sorry but statements like these really get to me. If you're gonna recommend somebody or say somebody sux at least back it up with some kind've observation or statistic besides who's hand they're holding.

On the topic, here's one reason Stoops is a poor choice. Pete Carroll was making fun of his scheme last year, particularly his defense, saying it was overly simplistic and basic. He said the west coast teams were way ahead of other conferences as far as the advancement of their offensive and defensive schemes and said one reason they were able to win so easily vs OK was because they (OU) never made them think with their basic defense. If Stoop's defense can't stop a college football team how is he gonna scheme for an NFL football team?

He has also been outcoached big time by the likes of Nick Saban and Bill Snyder.

I think Nick Saban has proven himself quite well as an NFL coach. He "outcoached" Stoops in a 7 point win in the Sugar Bowl.

Bill Snyder has only outcoached him once. Snyder is 1-4 vs Stoops.

B_Ambuehl

12-29-2005, 10:42 AM

No I do know things about Kirk Ferentz. But I wouldn't recommend him knowing only that he stood alongside Bellichik. I took time to look at some of his accomplishments this past year and look at his players as well as his scheme. He gets the job done in the big 10 with a bunch of white boys from Iowa. That right there should say a lot. I would not want him running and NFL offensive football team however. I watched some of his games and feel he lacks modernization/creativity on offense.

Saulbadguy

12-29-2005, 10:43 AM

The thing I like about both Ferentz and Stoops is they are successful wherever they go, and they delegate responsibilities very well. They get great assistants, and really bring out the best in the rest of their coaching staff.

dirk digler

12-29-2005, 10:43 AM

So just because he once coached under Belichik makes him a great coach? Sorry but statements like these really get to me. If you're gonna recommend somebody or say somebody sux at least back it up with some kind've observation or statistic besides who's hand they're holding.

On the topic, here's one reason Stoops is a poor choice. Pete Carroll was making fun of his scheme last year, particularly his defense, saying it was overly simplistic and basic. If Stoop's defense can't stop a college football team how is he gonna scheme for an NFL football team?

Didn't I say I did some research? As others have said the guy has developed and coached NFL players and yes being a disciple of Belichik is a huge postive IMHO. I think Nick Saban has done a hell of job in his first year in Miami.

I will be the first to admit though that I am not that big of a fan of college football and I don't follow it that much but many pro people say Kirk Ferentz would be a very good NFL coach.

jspchief

12-29-2005, 10:44 AM

As for Pete Carroll's assertion that the west coast teams are so far ahead of everybody offensively and defensivley...

How does he explain PAC 10 teams routinely getting man-handled by the other power conferences?

B_Ambuehl

12-29-2005, 10:46 AM

Saban already had NFL experience.

OU vs K-state...there is no talent comparison. Bill Snyder was always by far the best coach in the nation....no comparison....not even close.

FringeNC

12-29-2005, 10:46 AM

Presumably, if we fire DV and AS, the goal is to bring in a coach that can fix the D. How can Stoops or Edwards fix the D? What does Stoops know about NFL defenses? Edwards is not an Xs and Os guy. He can't fix it.

milehighfan

12-29-2005, 10:49 AM

look how good Quinn Snyder has done at MU after coaching under coach K. Coaching under a great coach does not necessarily make you a great coach. It can't hurt, but is by no means a prerequisite for success.

Brock

12-29-2005, 10:49 AM

Bill Snyder was always by far the best coach in the nation....no comparison....not even close.

ROFL

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 10:50 AM

So just because he once coached under Belichik makes him a great coach? Sorry but statements like these really get to me. If you're gonna recommend somebody or say somebody sux at least back it up with some kind've observation or statistic besides who's hand they're holding.

On the topic, here's one reason Stoops is a poor choice. Pete Carroll was making fun of his scheme last year, particularly his defense, saying it was overly simplistic and basic. He said the west coast teams were way ahead of other conferences as far as the advancement of their offensive and defensive schemes and said one reason they were able to win so easily vs OK was because they (OU) never made them think with their basic defense. If Stoop's defense can't stop a college football team how is he gonna scheme for an NFL football team?

He has also been outcoached big time by the likes of Nick Saban and Bill Snyder.

Many, many things make Saban and Ferentz great coaches. Those have been discusses ad nauseum, including earlier in this thread. You evidently haven't been paying attention, or chose to state your opinion without doing any research first. That's pretty hypocritical.

The fact that they were Belichick assistants doesn't make them great coaches. It ADDS to their already quite formidable resumes, just as when Belichick first started after being an assitant for Bill Parcells.

As for the relative advancement of schemes, who cares? Complexity does not equal effective. We've had one of the most complex defensive schemes in the NFL over the last 2 years, and before that we had an equally complex scheme. We've been one of the worst defenses in history. On the flip side, the Chicago Bears defense has only a handful of plays in it (only THREE blitzes) and yet they're the best defense in football.

B_Ambuehl

12-29-2005, 10:50 AM

As for Pete Carroll's assertion that the west coast teams are so far ahead of everybody offensively and defensivley...

How does he explain PAC 10 teams routinely getting man-handled by the other power conferences

I don't know. I do know that's what he said about Oklahomas defense though.

58-4ever

12-29-2005, 10:51 AM

Disagree.

He's had success everywhere he goes, as an assistant and a HC. He won a National Title with someone elses talent, which was inferior to the talent he has now.

You obviously know nothing about talent.
2000 national championship team: Mark Clayton, Roy Williams, Rocky Calmus, Torrence Marshall, Andre Woofolk, Teddy Lehman, Frank Romero.
I'll take this group of young men over this years and next years teams any day

Saulbadguy

12-29-2005, 10:51 AM

Saban already had NFL experience.

OU vs K-state...there is no talent comparison. Bill Snyder was always by far the best coach in the nation....no comparison....not even close.
K-State has 22 players on NFL rosters. Try again. He had talent.

jspchief

12-29-2005, 10:52 AM

Ferentz was the O-line coach of one of the most successful eras in Hawkeye football, including a Rose Bowl appearance and Big Ten title. As O-line coach he sent several players to the NFL including 3 first round picks. Ever hear of a guy by the name of John Alt?

Offensive lines under the direction of Ferentz anchored four of Iowa's highest scoring offenses. Five of Iowa's top offensive teams, in terms of yards gained per game, were operating behind Ferentz coached offensive lines. And, seven of Iowa's top 10 passing teams of all time occurred during the Ferentz years of the 1980's.

He went on to the NFL where he coached O-lines under Belichick and Ted Marchibroda.

Since returning to the Hawkeyes as head coach, he's won Big 10 Coach of the Year, AP Coach of the Year, Is one of four coaches to lead a team to finish no worse than 8th in the nation for 3 straight years ('02-'04).

Besides his actual resume, the most appealing thing about him is his coaching philosophy. He builds teams in the trenches that are fundamentally sound and play punishing football.

Saulbadguy

12-29-2005, 10:53 AM

You obviously know nothing about talent.
2000 national championship team: Mark Clayton, Roy Williams, Rocky Calmus, Torrence Marshall, Andre Woofolk, Teddy Lehman, Frank Romero.
I'll take this group of young men over this years and next years teams any day
How did that talent do in 1999, and 1998? 2003/2004s squads were much better than the 2000 team. Josh freaking Heupel. :rolleyes:

milkman

12-29-2005, 10:54 AM

look how good Quinn Snyder has done at MU after coaching under coach K. Coaching under a great coach does not necessarily make you a great coach. It can't hurt, but is by no means a prerequisite for success.

Nobody is saying that working under a great coach gaurantees success.

They are saying that Ferentz has done a good job at Iowa, with less talent than some of the big boys in college, and he has NFL experience under one of the best coaches in the game.

Those are positives that should earn him an NFL HC position.

Mr. Laz

12-29-2005, 10:56 AM

i like to know what makes anyone think that Carl Peterson is ready to take the kind of risk involved in hiring Bob Stoops?

Since when are the chiefs that aggressive?

laz
~thinks the Stoops rumor is complete and udder cow feces~

shakesthecat

12-29-2005, 10:56 AM

No I do know things about Kirk Ferentz. But I wouldn't recommend him knowing only that he stood alongside Bellichik. I took time to look at some of his accomplishments this past year and look at his players as well as his scheme. He gets the job done in the big 10 with a bunch of white boys from Iowa. That right there should say a lot. I would not want him running and NFL offensive football team however. I watched some of his games and feel he lacks modernization/creativity on offense.

You don't know jack about about the Iowa program.

White boys from Iowa huh?

Drew Tate? No
Solomon and Hinkel? No
Greenway and Hodge? No
Allen and Johnson? No
Albert Young? No

I could go on and on.

Saulbadguy

12-29-2005, 10:57 AM

i like to know what makes anyone think that Carl Peterson is ready to take the kind of risk involved in hiring Bob Stoops?

Since when are the chiefs that aggressive?

laz
~thinks the Stoops rumor is complete and udder cow feces~
Good point..which is probably why we will end up with Herm Edwards.

B_Ambuehl

12-29-2005, 10:58 AM

Many, many things make Saban and Ferentz great coaches. Those have been discusses ad nauseum, including earlier in this thread. You evidently haven't been paying attention, or chose to state your opinion without doing any research first. That's pretty hypocritical.

The fact that they were Belichick assistants doesn't make them great coaches. It ADDS to their already quite formidable resumes, just as when Belichick first started after being an assitant for Bill Parcells.

As for the relative advancement of schemes, who cares? Complexity does not equal effective. We've had one of the most complex defensive schemes in the NFL over the last 2 years, and before that we had an equally complex scheme. We've been one of the worst defenses in history. On the flip side, the Chicago Bears defense has only a handful of plays in it (only THREE blitzes) and yet they're the best defense in football.

So the guy who posted about Ferentz being good because he was associated with Bellichik.....did he talk about any of those "many" things that make him great or did he infer that he was great because he coached with Bellichick? As for me stating my opinion without doing any research, read what the hell I wrote a few posts after that.

If you wanna talk about complexity vs simplicity ask Pete Carroll. He said it not me. You also said Tim Lewis' defense is great and all that too so don't be trying to lecture me on defensive football.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 10:58 AM

No I do know things about Kirk Ferentz. But I wouldn't recommend him knowing only that he stood alongside Bellichik. I took time to look at some of his accomplishments this past year and look at his players as well as his scheme. He gets the job done in the big 10 with a bunch of white boys from Iowa. That right there should say a lot. I would not want him running and NFL offensive football team however. I watched some of his games and feel he lacks modernization/creativity on offense.

You've got to be ****ing kidding me.

Iowa was in the top 20 in rushing in 2002, 2003, and last season. In 2004, they were 117th out of 117 teams in D-1 football. They lost their top 5 RB's to injury and were forced to start a walk-on in-state "white boy".

Yet, they managed to go 10-2 and beat Saban in the Cap One. They averaged almost 25 points a game, without their top 5 RB's.

If that's not creativity, I'm guessing you don't have any idea what creativity is...

Baby Lee

12-29-2005, 10:59 AM

laz
~thinks the Stoops rumor is complete and udder cow feces~
Feces do NOT come from udders, and that's an anatomical FACT!!

FringeNC

12-29-2005, 11:01 AM

As for Pete Carroll's assertion that the west coast teams are so far ahead of everybody offensively and defensivley...

How does he explain PAC 10 teams routinely getting man-handled by the other power conferences?

Is that true? Does the Pac-10 have a terrible recent bowl record?

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 11:02 AM

So the guy who posted about Ferentz being good because he was associated with Bellichik.....did he talk about any of those "many" things that make him great or did he infer that he was great because he coached with Bellichick? As for me stating my opinion without doing any research, read what the hell I wrote a few posts after that.

If you wanna talk about complexity vs simplicity ask Pete Carroll. He said it not me. You also said Tim Lewis' defense is great and all that too so don't be trying to lecture me on defensive football.

The guy that posted that said after READING what I posted, he was convinced.

He didn't have to post it, because I already had. If you had read the thread before spouting off, you'd know that.

i like to know what makes anyone think that Carl Peterson is ready to take the kind of risk involved in hiring Bob Stoops?

Since when are the chiefs that aggressive?

laz
~thinks the Stoops rumor is complete and udder cow feces~

I don't think it would be an aggressive move on Carl's part.

Think about how the average fan would react to this news, the "real fan".

They'd see the name Bob Stoops, and throw their money at the Chiefs ticket office to purchase season tickets.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 11:04 AM

So the guy who posted about Ferentz being good because he was associated with Bellichik.....did he talk about any of those "many" things that make him great or did he infer that he was great because he coached with Bellichick? As for me stating my opinion without doing any research, read what the hell I wrote a few posts after that.

If you wanna talk about complexity vs simplicity ask Pete Carroll. He said it not me. You also said Tim Lewis' defense is great and all that too so don't be trying to lecture me on defensive football.

I said Tim Lewis was a good coach. I didn't say his defense is great.

And by all means, continue to tell everyone how they know nothing about football compared to you.

FringeNC

12-29-2005, 11:04 AM

You've got to be ****ing kidding me.

Iowa was in the top 20 in rushing in 2002, 2003, and last season. In 2004, they were 117th out of 117 teams in D-1 football. They lost their top 5 RB's to injury and were forced to start a walk-on in-state "white boy".

Yet, they managed to go 10-2 and beat Saban in the Cap One. They averaged almost 25 points a game, without their top 5 RB's.

If that's not creativity, I'm guessing you don't have any idea what creativity is...

Where does Iowa rank in the NCAA on total offense and scoring offense?

Saulbadguy

12-29-2005, 11:05 AM

Is that true? Does the Pac-10 have a terrible recent bowl record?
The next to best Pac-10 team last year (Cal) got blasted by Texas Tech, a middle of the pack Big XII team, in the Holiday bowl.

I'm willing to bet OU will beat Oregon in this years Holiday Bowl as well.

B_Ambuehl

12-29-2005, 11:06 AM

Well I guess we'll see how good an offense Ferentz runs when he gets to the NFL won't we? I don't think he'll have a lot of success in that dept. but I could be wrong. Like I said I only watched a few of his games and based on what I saw I don't think what he was running on offense with those college players will translate well to the NFL.......take that for what it's worth. There's only one way to prove it.

OU vs K-state...there is no talent comparison. Bill Snyder was always by far the best coach in the nation....no comparison....not even close.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

K-State has 22 players on NFL rosters. Try again. He had talent.

So K-State with Snyder had more talent then OU under Stoops right? Is that what your'e saying? Do a survey of college coaches and ask them who they think the best college coach is the last 10 or so years and the greatest coaching accomplishment the last 20. When you find one that doesn't have Snyder above Stoops then maybe we can talk.

Saulbadguy

12-29-2005, 11:07 AM

I don't think it would be an aggressive move on Carl's part.

Think about how the average fan would react to this news, the "real fan".

They'd see the name Bob Stoops, and throw their money at the Chiefs ticket office to purchase season tickets.
A new face would bring excitement to Arrowhead, that is for sure.

I'd be willing to bet most casual fans would be more excited to hear we hired a young college coach, than an also-ran.

Saulbadguy

12-29-2005, 11:08 AM

So K-State with Snyder had more talent then OU under Stoops right? Is that what your'e saying? Do a survey of college coaches and ask them who they think the best college coach is the last 10 or so years and the greatest coaching accomplishment the last 20. When you find one that doesn't have Snyder above Stoops then maybe we can talk.
No, but it was not like there was a huge talent disparity.

dirk digler

12-29-2005, 11:10 AM

So the guy who posted about Ferentz being good because he was associated with Bellichik.....did he talk about any of those "many" things that make him great or did he infer that he was great because he coached with Bellichick? As for me stating my opinion without doing any research, read what the hell I wrote a few posts after that.

If you wanna talk about complexity vs simplicity ask Pete Carroll. He said it not me. You also said Tim Lewis' defense is great and all that too so don't be trying to lecture me on defensive football.

That would be me and I said I did some research and I also listened to guys like Parker and jspchief who I respect their opinions when it comes to football and especially what happens in Iowa.

The next to best Pac-10 team last year (Cal) got blasted by Texas Tech, a middle of the pack Big XII team, in the Holiday bowl.

I'm willing to bet OU will beat Oregon in this years Holiday Bowl as well.

That's one game, just like USC embarrassing Oklahoma is one game. You'll have to do better than that.

B_Ambuehl

12-29-2005, 11:11 AM

I said Tim Lewis was a good coach. I didn't say his defense is great.

And by all means, continue to tell everyone how they know nothing about football compared to you.

No you implied his defenses were excellent because his team was 2-1 against the AFC west despite giving up 400 yards and 150 + yards rushing. You implied his defenses were better then Gregg Williams' defenses. You kept it up until I mentioned that, based on your warped thinking, G-Rob's defenses were better then all of them.

If people are going to talk out of their ass then I won't hesitate to acknowledge that.

nychief

12-29-2005, 11:13 AM

this is bullshit. Nick Athan is a fraud.

Mecca

12-29-2005, 11:14 AM

The next to best Pac-10 team last year (Cal) got blasted by Texas Tech, a middle of the pack Big XII team, in the Holiday bowl.

I'm willing to bet OU will beat Oregon in this years Holiday Bowl as well.

I think that may have had something to do with Cal feeling like they got jobbed out of the Rose Bowl. Usually teams that think they got hosed out of a big bowl play poorly.

Mr. Laz

12-29-2005, 11:15 AM

I don't think it would be an aggressive move on Carl's part.

Think about how the average fan would react to this news, the "real fan".

They'd see the name Bob Stoops, and throw their money at the Chiefs ticket office to purchase season tickets.

the season tickets are already being sold for the most part. Unless he thinks that the very name of Bob stoops would allow him to raise ticket prices there's not much financial upside to hiring bob stoops.

on the other side, there's a huge financial,competitive risk to hiring a college coach with zero NFL experience. Hiring Stoops would be a swing for the fences type move that the chiefs have avoided for most of Carl's tenure. It's a similar risk to drafting a QB in the first round ... Big Risk/Big Reward.

I've not seen any penchant for the big risk/reward type moves from the chiefs front office.

imo they much rather reduce the risk even if it means reducing the potential reward.

i expect the Chiefs next HC to have some kind of NFL experience ... more than likely he'll have NFL HC experience.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 11:18 AM

Where does Iowa rank in the NCAA on total offense and scoring offense?

2005
Total Offense - 22
Scoring Offense - 35

2004
Total Offense - 101
Scoring Offense - 68

2003
Total Offense - 92
Scoring Offense - 41

2002
Total Offense - 13
Scoring Offense - 7

2001
Total Offense - 45
Scoring Offense - 22

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 11:19 AM

No you implied his defenses were excellent because his team was 2-1 against the AFC west despite giving up 400 yards and 150 + yards rushing. You implied his defenses were better then Gregg Williams' defenses. You kept it up until I mentioned that, based on your warped thinking, G-Rob's defenses were better then all of them.

If people are going to talk out of their ass then I won't hesitate to acknowledge that.

You obviously have ZERO idea what my point was.

Mr. Laz

12-29-2005, 11:21 AM

You obviously have ZERO idea what my point was.
go ahead parker .... show him your point .... give him your point

:)

Cochise

12-29-2005, 11:21 AM

The more I read about Stoops the more it seems like a disaster waiting to happen.

And, I have read some funny stuff on the planet the last few days. Martz is the best coach in the NFL. Belichick is a mediocre coach who just got the bounces. Bill Snyder is the best college football coach evar. This place is full of surprises.

Hopefully a Taco-like prediction: Just wait. We're going to get Jim Mora.

milkman

12-29-2005, 11:23 AM

the season tickets are already being sold for the most part. Unless he thinks that the very name of Bob stoops would allow him to raise ticket prices there's not much financial upside to hiring bob stoops.

on the other side, theirs a big financial,competitive risk to hiring a college coach with zero NFL experience. Hiring Stoops would be a swing for the fences type move that the chiefs have avoided for most of Carl's tenure. It's a similar risk to drafting a QB in the first round ... Big Risk/Big Reward.

I've not seen any penchant for the big risk/reward type moves from the chiefs front office.

imo they much rather reduce the risk even if it means reduce the potential reward.

I expect the Chiefs next HC to have some kind of NFL experience ... more than likely he'll have NFL HC experience.

With regards to Stoops, my thinking is that "real fan" will give him more than one year to succeed, and as a result, continue to buy season tickets if his first season is something less than stellar, whereas, an established NFL coach wouldn't be given the same consideration.

But let's assume that you are correct, that Carl's next HC will have previous NFL HC on his resume.

Who would you want him to hire?

I haven't called you an idiot yet.
I look forward to the chance to do so. :)

58-4ever

12-29-2005, 11:24 AM

How did that talent do in 1999, and 1998? 2003/2004s squads were much better than the 2000 team. Josh freaking Heupel. :rolleyes:

well let's see: Brandon Daniels who returned kicks and played stellar wide receiver was the quarterback in 98. Romero went from D-line to O-line in that span. Woofolk eventually moved to D-back. John Blake had many of these kids with tremendous talent, but had many of them in the wrong position.

chagrin

12-29-2005, 11:25 AM

Stoops just looks way too much like Marty Mornhinweg...

dirk digler

12-29-2005, 11:29 AM

The more I read about Stoops the more it seems like a disaster waiting to happen.

And, I have read some funny stuff on the planet the last few days. Martz is the best coach in the NFL. Belichick is a mediocre coach who just got the bounces. Bill Snyder is the best college football coach evar. This place is full of surprises.

Hopefully a Taco-like prediction: Just wait. We're going to get Jim Mora.

So true. I can't believe some of the shit that is said on here.

I will go on record and say the only coach I really, really, really want is Jimmy Johnson.

The others would be ok but I won't be overly excited.

Go ahead and flame away.

Mr. Laz

12-29-2005, 11:30 AM

With regards to Stoops, my thinking is that "real fan" will give him more than one year to succeed, and as a result, continue to buy season tickets if his first season is something less than stellar, whereas, an established NFL coach wouldn't be given the same consideration.

But let's assume that you are correct, that Carl's next HC will have previous NFL HC on his resume.

Who would you want him to hire?

I haven't called you an idiot yet.
I look forward to the chance to do so. :)
well,well ... milkman is froggy today :p

btw it's not just the chiefs ... hiring a college coach without any NFL experience is avoided by most organizations.

my first inclination is to promote Al Saunders and keep the offensive coaching staff and system as is. Then fire the entire defensive coaching staff and go out and get a guy who can run the defensive side of the ball. Maybe a Defensive guy who has been a HC already so he can really take charge and hire his own defensive coaches etc.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 11:31 AM

go ahead parker .... show him your point .... give him your point

:)

You probably have more experience arguing with me than anybody else here.

Here's what he's saying is proof that I think Lewis' defense is "excellent":

So Tim Lewis is 2-1 vs. the AFC West and he's a bad choice, but Gregg Williams is a good choice even though he's 0-4.

I see what the deal is.

People care more about yardage than winning. Vermeil might as well stay. That's all he cares about too.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 11:32 AM

well,well ... milkman is froggy today :p

btw it's not just the chiefs ... hiring a college coach without any NFL experience is avoided by most organizations.

my first inclination is to promote Al Saunders and keep the offensive coaching staff and system as is. Then fire the entire defensive coaching staff and go out and get a guy who can run the defensive side of the ball. Maybe a Defensive guy who has been a HC already so he can really take charge and hire his own defensive coaches etc.

I'd be a little concerned that Saunders would keep the defensive coaches. They've all worked together before, both in KC and St. Louis.

This whole coaching staff is basically a group of friends.

FringeNC

12-29-2005, 11:32 AM

I guess Carl is after a Rah-rah guy. First, he thought Gun with that style could improve the D. Now he thinks he needs a head coach like that to improve the D.

Here's a novel suggestion for Carl: how about hire substance over style....someone who actually knows something about defenses, like Gregg Williams.

Mr. Laz

12-29-2005, 11:34 AM

You probably have more experience arguing with me than anybody else here.

Here's what he's saying is proof that I think Lewis' defense is "excellent":
actually i was just making a sophomoric comment about you giving another poster "your point"

point = penis .... get it?!? ROFL ROFL

:shrug: STFU

chagrin

12-29-2005, 11:36 AM

actually i was just making a sophomoric comment about you giving another poster "your point"

point = penis .... get it?!? ROFL ROFL

:shrug: STFU

:eek:

AHH! a Ghey sighting! Pack up the Babies, grab the old ladies...head for th hills!!

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 11:36 AM

I guess Carl is after a Rah-rah guy. First, he thought Gun with that style could improve the D. Now he thinks he needs a head coach like that to improve the D.

Here's a novel suggestion for Carl: how about hire substance over style....someone who actually knows something about defenses, like Gregg Williams.

I agree. We need a tactician. And as for how they deal with players - we need a stern disciplinarian. The chaotic flying off the handle of Gunther is the wrong way to go about it...

Mr. Laz

12-29-2005, 11:36 AM

I'd be a little concerned that Saunders would keep the defensive coaches. They've all worked together before, both in KC and St. Louis.

This whole coaching staff is basically a group of friends.
i would make it conditional on the Saunders promotion.

if he wants the job he needs to make a complete change on the defensive side of the ball.

If he didn't want to make those changes he could get a job somewhere else.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 11:37 AM

actually i was just making a sophomoric comment about you giving another poster "your point"

point = penis .... get it?!? ROFL ROFL

:shrug: STFU

I'm officially worried about you, man.

:D

FringeNC

12-29-2005, 11:37 AM

You probably have more experience arguing with me than anybody else here.

Here's what he's saying is proof that I think Lewis' defense is "excellent":

And I still say my pitcher analogy fits perfectly: A DC, just like the pitcher, controls one side of a game. Lewis / Williams performance against AFC W teams should be evaluated using only defensive metrics, given that they have nothing to do with offense.

milkman

12-29-2005, 11:39 AM

I'd be a little concerned that Saunders would keep the defensive coaches. They've all worked together before, both in KC and St. Louis.

This whole coaching staff is basically a group of friends.

And Al and Gun go back as far as SD together.

Retaning Gun is the primary reason I'd be afraid of Al getting promoted to HC.

dirk digler

12-29-2005, 11:40 AM

i would make it conditional on the Saunders promotion.

if he wants the job he needs to make a complete change on the defensive side of the ball.

If he didn't want to make those changes he could get a job somewhere else.

The only problem I have with that is I could see Saunders hiring Joe Vitt as the D coordinator.

dirk digler

12-29-2005, 11:41 AM

And Al and Gun go back as far as SD together.

Retaning Gun is the primary reason I'd be afraid of Al getting promoted to HC.

I thought they don't get along very well but I could be wrong.

FringeNC

12-29-2005, 11:42 AM

And Al and Gun go back as far as SD together.

Retaning Gun is the primary reason I'd be afraid of Al getting promoted to HC.

I don't think Al and Gun are close. I agree, though, if Al wanted to retain Gun, that's a huge problem. I think it would be like Carl would try to force Al to retain Gun, but that's speculation.

milkman

12-29-2005, 11:44 AM

I thought they don't get along very well but I could be wrong.

I've read speculation on here that they don't get along, but I've never read anything elsewhere to suggest that.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 11:50 AM

And I still say my pitcher analogy fits perfectly: A DC, just like the pitcher, controls one side of a game. Lewis / Williams performance against AFC W teams should be evaluated using only defensive metrics, given that they have nothing to do with offense.

A pitcher is a player. He has a singular role.

A coach, of any kind, has intangible benefits (or detriments) because he has domain over a GROUP of players. The coach is responsible for motivation (or demotivation) and that can have a impact on the entire team, both in the course of a game and the course of a season.

I agree that defensive metrics should be paramount. But they're not the only measuring stick. Especially when all Ambuehl is using is yards (which is virtually worthless).

For instance, Greg Williams' defense gave up 19 point to the Chiefs, 24 points to the Chargers, 21 points to the Broncos, and 16 to the Raiders.

Tim Lewis' defense gave up 23 to the Broncos, 17 to the Chiefs, and 45 to the Chargers.

That stat is FAR more telling than looking at yards. It would appear that Lewis' defenses aren't as inferior as Ambuehl would have everyone believe, although that Charger loss is REALLY bad.

B_Ambuehl

12-29-2005, 12:00 PM

Go find the top 5 defenses in total yards allowed and relate them to total points allowed and tell me what you find.

If you wanna talk about points there's still an 8 pt difference between the avg of Lewis's defense vs Williams defense....eight points is a lot in this league.

And does this not sound like you're saying he (Lewis) has a good defense?

The AFC West has 3 or 4 of the best RB's/rushing attacks in the league, so what? How has he done in general?

This argument is pretty weak.

He's 2-1 against the AFC West.

If he played them twice instead of once, he'd be 4-2 and we'd have the same record that Dick Vermeil has.

Thanks for playing. Try again.

And yes I think that pitching analogy was perfect. A defensive coordinator or an offensive coordinator has ZERO to do with the opposite side of the football.

If this is supposed to be an explanation as to why defensive coordinators affect offensive performance and vice versa it's a perfect illustration of a reach.

A coach, of any kind, has intangible benefits (or detriments) because he has domain over a GROUP of players. The coach is responsible for motivation (or demotivation) and that can have a impact on the entire team, both in the course of a game and the course of a season.

Brock

12-29-2005, 12:03 PM

What's it matter? Tim Lewis isn't a credible candidate in the first place.

Cochise

12-29-2005, 12:04 PM

And does this not sound like you're saying he (Lewis) has a good defense?

No, it doesn't sound like that at all. It sounds like he's saying your argument makes no sense, not that Lewis has a good defense.

ct

12-29-2005, 12:06 PM

Al Saunders retaining Gun as DC, and continuation of the existing offensive scheme(for the most part, depends on the autonomy to the next OC) are the only reasons I would be ok with him as next HC.

Al Saunders retaining Gun as DC, and continuation of the existing offensive scheme(for the most part, depends on the autonomy to the next OC) are the only reasons I would be ok with him as next HC.

Also realize I'm in a small minority who've not given up on Gun.

I haven't given up on Gun.

I have never been a fan.

I never thought he'd be this bad, though.

Rausch

12-29-2005, 12:12 PM

Also realize I'm in a small minority who've not given up on Gun.

Same here.

milkman

12-29-2005, 12:12 PM

it's Teh Ghey, it's Teh Ghey ......... run away,run away!!!

http://img321.exs.cx/img321/871/s4gx.gif

OK, that is just funny!

Rep!

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 12:25 PM

Go find the top 5 defenses in total yards allowed and relate them to total points allowed and tell me what you find.

If you wanna talk about points there's still an 8 pt difference between the avg of Lewis's defense vs Williams defense....eight points is a lot in this league.

And does this not sound like you're saying he (Lewis) has a good defense?

And yes I think that pitching analogy was perfect. A defensive coordinator or an offensive coordinator has ZERO to do with the opposite side of the football.

If this is supposed to be an explanation as to why defensive coordinators affect offensive performance and vice versa it's a perfect illustration of a reach.

I guess this might be a good time for this then:

You're advocating Gregg Williams for HEAD COACH. You've defended that with a litany of stats from his stint as a defensive coordinator.

Now that's a perfect illustration of a reach. Maybe you should endlessly analyze his 17-31 record as a head coach.

Or better yet, tell us again how the head coach has no control over it, it's all on the coordinators...

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 12:25 PM

No, it doesn't sound like that at all. It sounds like he's saying your argument makes no sense, not that Lewis has a good defense.

At least somebody understands.

FringeNC

12-29-2005, 12:28 PM

That stat is FAR more telling than looking at yards. It would appear that Lewis' defenses aren't as inferior as Ambuehl would have everyone believe, although that Charger loss is REALLY bad.

I'm not so sure about that. Suppose we are at the halfway point in the year. Take the team that has the fewest yards allowed vs. the team that has the fewest points allowed. Which team do you predict will give up the least points for the remainder of the year? To me, the answer is not obvious. I think there is a lot of noise in points allowed, such as turnovers, kick returns, etc...Whereas, there is not much noise in yards allowed.

milkman

12-29-2005, 12:33 PM

At least somebody understands.

Hell, I think everyone understands except for B Ambhuel.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 12:33 PM

I'm not so sure about that. Suppose we are at the halfway point in the year. Take the team that has the fewest yards allowed vs. the team that has the fewest points allowed. Which team do you predict will give up the least points for the remainder of the year? To me, the answer is not obvious. I think there is a lot of noise in points allowed, such as turnovers, kick returns, etc...Whereas, there is not much noise in yards allowed.

Turnovers are "noise"?

ROFL

That's absurd.

And kick returns aren't figured in defensive points against.

The numbers I posted were points scored only against the defense, not special teams or anything else.

FringeNC

12-29-2005, 12:38 PM

Turnovers are "noise"?

ROFL

That's absurd.

And kick returns are figured in defensive points against.

The numbers I posted were points scored only against the defense, not special teams or anything else.

Yeah, absurd is the reason that total yardage statistics are part of the model used by Vegas to calculate the point spread. I'm not saying yardage IS a better predictor. I am saying it's not obvious to me that it is a worse predictor of future points allowed.

Mr. Laz

12-29-2005, 12:39 PM

Hasn't Tim lewis always been a DC under a defensive minded head coach?

i would worry whether he can do it on his own.

LiL stumppy

12-29-2005, 12:41 PM

I would rather have Herm Edwards and leave Stoops right where he is :)

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 12:44 PM

Yeah, absurd is the reason that total yardage statistics are part of the model used by Vegas to calculate the point spread. I'm not saying yardage IS a better predictor. I am saying it's not obvious to me that it is a worse predictor of future points allowed.

They are a PART of the calculation. What does that have to do with anything? You said turnovers were "noise" and I said THAT was absurd. I didn't say anything about the use of total yards being absurd.

Go to pro-football-reference.com.

Take a look at takeaways, yards, and points allowed over the last 10 years.

The conclusion is OBVIOUS.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 12:45 PM

Hasn't Tim lewis always been a DC under a defensive minded head coach?

i would worry whether he can do it on his own.

Very valid.

Same situation as Gunther.

milkman

12-29-2005, 12:54 PM

I would rather have Herm Edwards and leave Stoops right where he is :)

I would rather they both stay where they are.

FringeNC

12-29-2005, 01:01 PM

They are a PART of the calculation. What does that have to do with anything? You said turnovers were "noise" and I said THAT was absurd. I didn't say anything about the use of total yards being absurd.

Go to pro-football-reference.com.

Take a look at takeaways, yards, and points allowed over the last 10 years.

The conclusion is OBVIOUS.

Turnovers are huge, no doubt. But how consistent are TOs from year to year. Did Greg Robinson suddenly turn into a genius in 2003? Yardage figures have noise in them, too. Junk yards at the end of the game.

Stated differently: I'd be very suspect of a D that was #2 in scoring D, yet #17 in total yardage. (Unless they had a great O and got huge leads and gave up garbage yards in a soft zone a la the 99-01 Rams.) I say that they will not be able to sustain that the next year. You make it sound as if total yardage is irrelevant when measuring D performance. It is not.

B_Ambuehl

12-29-2005, 01:02 PM

I guess this might be a good time for this then:

You're advocating Gregg Williams for HEAD COACH. You've defended that with a litany of stats from his stint as a defensive coordinator.

Now that's a perfect illustration of a reach. Maybe you should endlessly analyze his 17-31 record as a head coach.

Or better yet, tell us again how the head coach has no control over it, it's all on the coordinators...

Dude quit trying to change the subject. First you said Tim Lewis has a better defense then Gregg Williams. Then you say defensive coordinators are responsible for offensive performance. Now, having lost out on those arguments you're NOW trying to start an argument about Greg Williams resume as a head coaching prospect when back at the beginning of this thread you actually agreed with someone recommending Williams because of his X's and O's ability.

Here's a novel suggestion for Carl: how about hire substance over style....someone who actually knows something about defenses, like Gregg Williams.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree. We need a tactician. And as for how they deal with players - we need a stern disciplinarian. The chaotic flying off the handle of Gunther is the wrong way to go about it...

Guess what Chester, I didn't make him a prospect. I simply analyzed the guys who were already being talked about as prospects.

Now after the fact you'll probably say that your above quote wasn't meant to be a vote of confidence for Gregg Williams.

Give it up.

Cochise

12-29-2005, 01:09 PM

Dude quit trying to change the subject. First you said Tim Lewis has a better defense then Gregg Williams. Then you say defensive coordinators are responsible for offensive performance. Now, having lost out on those arguments you're NOW trying to start an argument about Greg Williams resume as a head coaching prospect when back at the beginning of this thread you actually agreed with someone recommending Williams because of his X's and O's ability.

There's one person here who appears to be flailing, and it isn't him...

sedated

12-29-2005, 01:11 PM

9 pages based on a Nick Athan rumor?

embarrasing

B_Ambuehl

12-29-2005, 01:16 PM

And on every thread cochise there always seems to be about 45 people like you who are too clueless to add anything of substance yet can always be counted on for your stupid little one liners and promotion of the good ol' boy network that obviously exists around here.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 01:19 PM

Turnovers are huge, no doubt. But how consistent are TOs from year to year. Did Greg Robinson suddenly turn into a genius in 2003? Yardage figures have noise in them, too. Junk yards at the end of the game.

Stated differently: I'd be very suspect of a D that was #2 in scoring D, yet #17 in total yardage. (Unless they had a great O and got huge leads and gave up garbage yards in a soft zone a la the 99-01 Rams.) I say that they will not be able to sustain that the next year. You make it sound as if total yardage is irrelevant when measuring D performance. It is not.

Go look at Super Bowls teams over the last 15 years. #2 in scoring, #17 in yardage wins alot of them.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 01:20 PM

Dude quit trying to change the subject. First you said Tim Lewis has a better defense then Gregg Williams. Then you say defensive coordinators are responsible for offensive performance. Now, having lost out on those arguments you're NOW trying to start an argument about Greg Williams resume as a head coaching prospect when back at the beginning of this thread you actually agreed with someone recommending Williams because of his X's and O's ability.

Guess what Chester, I didn't make him a prospect. I simply analyzed the guys who were already being talked about as prospects.

Now after the fact you'll probably say that your above quote wasn't meant to be a vote of confidence for Gregg Williams.

Give it up.

ROFL

Where did I say Tim Lewis had a better defense? Show me.

Fact is, you have NO IDEA what I'm talking about. You're completely lost.

God forbid we don't all bow down to your superior football intellect.

milkman

12-29-2005, 01:21 PM

And on every thread cochise there always seems to be about 45 people like you who are too clueless to add anything of substance yet can always be counted on for your stupid little one liners and promotion of the good ol' boy network that obviously exists around here.

Ah yes, the PPL is alive and well.

FringeNC

12-29-2005, 01:24 PM

Go look at Super Bowls teams over the last 15 years. #2 in scoring, #17 in yardage wins alot of them.

Sure, I don't doubt it if the have a good offense.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 01:24 PM

And on every thread cochise there always seems to be about 45 people like you who are too clueless to add anything of substance yet can always be counted on for your stupid little one liners and promotion of the good ol' boy network that obviously exists around here.

They've given up trying to add anything of substance to the discussion. You're right and we're all wrong, so why bother?

:hail:

CoMoChief

12-29-2005, 01:28 PM

Why not Mike Ditka or Jim Mora?

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 01:28 PM

Sure, I don't doubt it if the have a good offense.

Scoring or yardage? Good scoring offenses often feed off of defensive turnovers.

New England in 2001 was 6th in scoring defense and 24th in yards. They were 6th in scoring offense, and 19th in yards.

In 2003, they were 12th in scoring offense and 1st in scoring defense. They were 7th in yards allowed.

FringeNC

12-29-2005, 01:34 PM

Scoring or yardage? Good scoring offenses often feed off of defensive turnovers.

New England in 2001 was 6th in scoring defense and 24th in yards. They were 6th in scoring offense, and 19th in yards.

In 2003, they were 12th in scoring offense and 1st in scoring defense. They were 7th in yards allowed.

I knew you'd pull up Belichick sooner or later. I think it is futile to try draw lessons from Belichick's run. He is a football god. Mere mortal coaches cannot win with numbers like that. Marty could make it to the playoffs with numbers like that, then the competition would catch up to him.

Belichick's teams seem to do just what is necessary to win in the regular season, then turn it up a notch or two in the playoffs.

Cochise

12-29-2005, 01:42 PM

And on every thread cochise there always seems to be about 45 people like you who are too clueless to add anything of substance yet can always be counted on for your stupid little one liners and promotion of the good ol' boy network that obviously exists around here.

ROFL I agree that there is a good'ol boy network here, but I am surprised to learn that I am a part of it.

I am calling this like I read it. As far as clueless goes, I haven't seen anyone else comment backing up your straw man of his argument. When everyone else in the village is "crazy", I might start to question my own point of view...

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 01:45 PM

I knew you'd pull up Belichick sooner or later. I think it is futile to try draw lessons from Belichick's run. He is a football god. Mere mortal coaches cannot win with numbers like that. Marty could make it to the playoffs with numbers like that, then the competition would catch up to him.

Belichick's teams seem to do just what is necessary to win in the regular season, then turn it up a notch or two in the playoffs.

There's been other teams to do it, but I know where you're coming from, and that wasn't really the point anyway.

The point is that total yardage, all by itself, is a relatively poor indicator of how good a defense is.

On this yards allowed vs points allowed: Of the top 5 yardage defenses, 4 of them are in the top 5 scoring defenses and ALL of them are in the top 10 scoring defenses. Six of the top scoring defenses are also in the top 10 in yards allowed so there's more then just a minor correlation there.

For what it's worth, Tim Lewis is number 25 in yards allowed and 15 scoring. That's not a whole lot better then the defense of Gunther Cunningham, which ranks 27th in yards allowed and 20th in scoring.

LiL stumppy

12-29-2005, 02:03 PM

I would rather they both stay where they are.

Better than Mike Martz.

milkman

12-29-2005, 02:07 PM

Better than Mike Martz.

Yeah, so, dying in your sleep is better than being tortured to death.
But in the end, I'd rather not die at all.

jspchief

12-29-2005, 02:21 PM

Bill Snyder was always by far the best coach in the nation....no comparison....not even close.

Someone just pissed away any semblance of credibility they might have ever had in a football discussion.

tk13

12-29-2005, 02:40 PM

Gah, I'm not real sure about Stoops. We don't need another coach who completely chokes on his own tongue in big games. Plus the whole no-NFL experience thing, I'd only want to do that if we had to completely rebuild. We're not a 1-15 team looking to build from the ground up.

KCChiefsFan88

12-29-2005, 02:49 PM

This is probably unfair, but I can't get past the way OU finished the 2003 season, looking horrible against K-State and LSU.

Plus, they got obliterated by USC last year. Wasn't even competitive.

It isn't unfair at all to put a lot of weight on those games when evaluating how good of an NFL coach Bob Stoops would be.

Pete Carroll and Nick Saban 2 of the closest guys you'll find in the college ranks to NFL-caliber Head Coaches (Carroll with prior NFL head coaching experience, and Saban now an NFL head coach) totally outcoached and humiliated Stoops in both of those games.

I can't look past the 2003 Big 12 Championship game, the late season choke jobs to teams like Texas A&M and Oklahoma St (both of whom ripped apart Stoops' defense).

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 03:26 PM

Hey Ambuehl...

All arguments aside, who do you WANT to be the next coach? Forget analyzing all of the candidates.

If you were GM and could pick anyone you want, who would it be and why?

You're analysis is always deep and researched, even if I don't agree with it, and I'd really like to see what you come up with.

Chiefnj

12-29-2005, 03:51 PM

Hey Ambuehl...

All arguments aside, who do you WANT to be the next coach? Forget analyzing all of the candidates.

If you were GM and could pick anyone you want, who would it be and why?

You're analysis is always deep and researched, even if I don't agree with it, and I'd really like to see what you come up with.

I think he previously answered - Saunders.

htismaqe

12-29-2005, 04:08 PM

I think he previously answered - Saunders.

Hmmm...I guess I missed that...

Mecca

12-29-2005, 04:11 PM

No matter who is hired, half this board is going to go apeshit. I'm awaiting that humerous day.

dirk digler

12-29-2005, 04:17 PM

No matter who is hired, half this board is going to go apeshit. I'm awaiting that humerous day.

It will be a fun day indeed. But if DV comes back this place will be hell on earth, in a virtual way.

Mr. Laz

12-29-2005, 06:39 PM

No matter who is hired, half this board is going to go apeshit. I'm awaiting that humerous day.

great, another somebody who hopes for bad things to happen for the chiefs just so they can laugh at the chiefplanet posts.

milkman

12-29-2005, 06:50 PM

great, another somebody who hopes for bad things to happen for the chiefs just so they can laugh at the chiefplanet posts.

I don't think Mecca is waiting for bad things to happen.

It's pretty obvious that there isn't a consensus Planet choice out there among potential HC candidates, so it doesn't matter who is hired.

Numerrous people will meltdown.

B_Ambuehl

12-29-2005, 07:13 PM

Hey Ambuehl...

All arguments aside, who do you WANT to be the next coach? Forget analyzing all of the candidates.

If you were GM and could pick anyone you want, who would it be and why?

You're analysis is always deep and researched, even if I don't agree with it, and I'd really like to see what you come up with.

It's hard to say because every pick I make has a condition attached to it.

1a. DV....but only if Gunther leaves.
1b. Saunders...but only if DV "voluntarily" walks away and Gunther leaves.
1c. Greg Williams....but only if he retains Solari or Shea as O.C.

I'd be happy with any of those. On the 2nd tier I'd be slightly unhappy with:

4. Herm....but only if he retains one of the current offensive guys to run the offense and doesn't bring Donnie Henderson with him.

Since none of those are likely to happen the way I'd want them to I might as well throw up a vote for Rick Kotite. :)

Hoover

12-29-2005, 07:25 PM

Ferentz will not leave Iowa till after 2008, The year he wins a national championship.

FringeNC

12-29-2005, 07:41 PM

It's hard to say because every pick I make has a condition attached to it.

1a. DV....but only if Gunther leaves.
1b. Saunders...but only if DV "voluntarily" walks away and Gunther leaves.
1c. Greg Williams....but only if he retains Solari or Shea as O.C.

I'd be happy with any of those. On the 2nd tier I'd be slightly unhappy with:

4. Herm....but only if he retains one of the current offensive guys to run the offense and doesn't bring Donnie Henderson with him.

Since none of those are likely to happen the way I'd want them to I might as well throw up a vote for Rick Kotite. :)

I don't know anything about Donnie Henderson, but I know I don't want Herm coming here and retaining Gunther.

Mr. Laz

12-29-2005, 07:51 PM

Ferentz will not leave Iowa till after 2008, The year he wins a national championship.

Ferentz will not leave Iowa till after 2008, The year he wins a national championship.

ROFL

That's the kind of talk from Jihadic Hawk fans that gets people like Frankie talking about the Hawkeyes being underachievers.

This team isn't ready for a NC, not yet.

The real angle is this:

Ferentz wants all of his kids to complete school where they are. His youngest kid is 12. Unless something huge (read: huge $$$) happens, he won't be leaving until around 2010...

htismaqe

12-30-2005, 07:50 AM

It's hard to say because every pick I make has a condition attached to it.

1a. DV....but only if Gunther leaves.
1b. Saunders...but only if DV "voluntarily" walks away and Gunther leaves.
1c. Greg Williams....but only if he retains Solari or Shea as O.C.

I'd be happy with any of those. On the 2nd tier I'd be slightly unhappy with:

4. Herm....but only if he retains one of the current offensive guys to run the offense and doesn't bring Donnie Henderson with him.

Since none of those are likely to happen the way I'd want them to I might as well throw up a vote for Rick Kotite. :)

One question:

Why Shea? He was a miserable failure in Chicago, and they've done a bit better this year, even with Kyle of the 45 QB Rating...

It will be interesting to see if it was him, or the Bears. I think I'd rather have Solari than take that chance.

penchief

12-30-2005, 09:49 AM

One of the things that works in our favor is LJ. If we have a coaching change I believe we'll have a good shot at landing a quality defensive-minded coach. Any coach would relish the thought of having a game-controlling RB to build his offense around. LJ might be the most dominant back in that mold. Any defensive-minded coach with confidence in his coaching ability and evaluation skills would probably give KC solid consideration.

We do have talent on defense. Poor coaching has been the biggest problem, IMO.

jspchief

12-30-2005, 10:02 AM

One question:

Why Shea? He was a miserable failure in Chicago, and they've done a bit better this year, even with Kyle of the 45 QB Rating...

It will be interesting to see if it was him, or the Bears. I think I'd rather have Solari than take that chance.Did Shea really get a chance? He was trying to make a bunch of bum QBs into Trent Green, Thomas Jones into Priest Holmes, and a patchwork line into the equivalent of KC's line. And he was only given one year to do it. Remember this O in year one at KC?

Not saying Shea is or will be a great coach, but I'm not sure we've seen a large enough sample to say he won't be.

B_Ambuehl

12-30-2005, 10:04 AM

Yeah I'm not sure about Shea either. He does have the benefit of gameplanning and calling a full offense though whereas Solari is only responsible right now for gameplanning and implementing the running game. I never paid much attention to Chicago last year, but guys like Chad Hutchinson and Jonathan Quinn would have a hard time picking up a first down in an 11 on 0 offensive drill. :) They (the Bears) still run a lot of that same offense this year and seeing it with Grossman in there is like night and day compared to Horton.

htismaqe

12-30-2005, 10:17 AM

Did Shea really get a chance? He was trying to make a bunch of bum QBs into Trent Green, Thomas Jones into Priest Holmes, and a patchwork line into the equivalent of KC's line. And he was only given one year to do it. Remember this O in year one at KC?

Not saying Shea is or will be a great coach, but I'm not sure we've seen a large enough sample to say he won't be.

By no means am I saying the story on Shea is complete. Just that he concerns me.

But even with Kyle Orton, the Bears offense has been much better this year - especially the running game. They drafted Cedric Benson because they're running game was so bad last year. Bring in new O coordinator and all of the sudden Thomas Jones is performing at a near
Pro Bowl level...

Also, Shane brought up a good point the other day - prior to coming to KC, the offense that Shea used was WCO, ala Bill Walsh.

jspchief

12-30-2005, 10:27 AM

Their running game wasn't that bad. Jones was on pace for around 1200 yards if not for injury and splitting carries late in the year. And their O-line was in terrible shape, and they had no passing threat (WR or QB).

Their offense isn't much better this year. It's just that the defense is playing well enough to make it work now.

Again, I'm not really arguing for Shea. Just pointing out that that debacle in chicago doesn't tell us much of anything.